Structure afid Economic of the Annulate Animals. 235 



I have described this as a new species, the more confidently 

 that I have the authority of my friend Mr. J. E. Gray for 

 doing so. In general form and size it resembles ^^g« emar- 

 ginata ; but very obviously differs from that species by the 

 remarkable proximity of the eyes, which, in the emarginata, 

 are separated by a considerable interval. The smaller spe- 

 cimen seems to possess the specific characters of the ^^ga 

 bicarinata of Leach ; and I should mention that this specimen 

 had not been seen by Mr. Gray when he gave me his opi- 

 nion : but Dr. Leach would scarcely have left the peculiarity 

 in the position of the eyes without some notice, had his species 

 exhibited it. If I am right in deciding that it is of the same 

 species as the larger individual, and probably the male of it 

 (and, surely, the differences are not sufficient to warrant a 

 belief that they are distinct species), then it would seem to 

 follow, first, that the great dilatation of the basilar joints of 

 the antennae is a sexual character, or one dependent on age, 

 and of insufficient value, therefore, to be ranked among cha- 

 racters which are seized upon to divide tribes or families 

 from each other ; and, secondly, that the conformation of the 

 extreme caudal segment is not sufficient to discriminate spe- 

 cies, as Dr. Leach seems to have believed, for his specific 

 characters embrace no other part. 



Berwick upon Tweed, Jan, 20. 1834. 



Art. VI. On the Structure of the Annulate Animals, and its Re- 

 lation to their Economy, [Continued from p. 125.] By CI. 



There is nothing more unaccountable than the tenacity with 

 which we cling to old opinions, simply because they are old ; 

 nor than the pompous and solemn gravity with which we tell 

 the most palpable and absurd untruths, simply because our 

 forefathers told them. Wherefore can this be ? The pro- 

 blem we will, however, leave, for solution, to the meta- 

 physicians. One of these established fallacies has descended, 

 with all its pomp, from the time of Aristotle to within a few 

 years of the present day ; namely, that insects are without 

 blood. When, however, the great discovery of the cir- 

 culation of blood in the higher animals was made, insects 

 were designated as being without a circulating blood. This 

 distinction was considered perfect, until one or two enquiring 

 minds, wishing to ascertain why this difference should exist, 

 examined for themselves, and found it did not exist. 



The circulation of blood in annulates appears to have been 

 generally doubted in this country, until Mr. Bowerbank, one 



